Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

resentatives, August 8, 1846, Mr. DAVID WILMOT, of Pennsylvania, proposed the following amendment: provided, "That asan express and fundamental condition to the acquisition of any territory from the Republic of Mexico by the United States, by virtue of any treaty which may be negotiated between them, and to the use by the Executive of the moneys herein appropriated, neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist in any part of said territory, except for crime, whereof the party shall first be duly convicted."

Mr. WICK moved to amend the amendment by inserting therein, after the word "territory," the words, "north of 36° 30' north latitude."

The amendment to the amendment was disagreed to―ayes 54, noes 89.

The question then recurring on the original amendment of Mr. WILMOT, it was decided in the affirmative-ayes 83, noes 64.

This amendment, with some modifications, came up for consideration in the House, March 3, 1847. It was rejected by a vote of 97 in favor, and 102 against the proviso. The votes of the New England States were in favor of the proviso; the votes of the Southern States were opposed to the proviso.

REMARKS.

1. As Northern views prevailed in Congress, during the Administration of General HARRISON and Mr. TYLER; so Southern views prevailed in regard to political principles and policy during the Administration of Mr. POLK.

2. Mr. VAN BUREN expected the nomination to the Presidency from the Democratic party in 1844, but failed of receiving it on account of his declared opposition to the immediate annexation of Texas, which prevented his receiving the votes of Southern delegates in the Convention. Mr. CLAY, for the same reason, failed of his election. He neither satisfied the South, nor all the free soilers of the North, by his letters in respect to Texas.

3. The adoption of the Wilmot proviso in the House on its first introduction, alarmed and wounded the South. This attempt to exclude Southern men and Southern institutions from

the territories which were won by the common blood and the common treasure of the States, created a deep sense of injury in the hearts of Southern people. On the other hand, the legislatures of several Northern States passed resolves approving of the proviso, while the Northern press and Northern speechmakers were clamorous in its favor, and, to some extent, kindled up a fanatical spirit throughout that section. In opposition to these movements, resolutions were introduced by Mr. CALHOUN into the Senate of the United States, declaring that the territories of the United States belong to the several States as joint property; that Congress, as the joint agent of the States, has no right to discriminate between the States, so as to deprive any of them of its full and equal right in any territory of the United States; that the enactment of any law which should deprive the citizens of any of the States from emigrating with their property into any of the territories of the Union, will make such discrimination, and would be a violation of the Constitution and the rights of the States from which such citizens emigrated. These resolutions, though never pressed to a vote, had their influence in Congress and the country.

4. It should be borne in mind that the Northern States claimed all of the territories for themselves, and their citizens, and their institutions.

The Southern States claimed a part, or half of the territories for themselves, and their citizens, and their institutions.

Which of the two sections was the more generous and liberal and just?

5. The following is one of a series of resolutions adopted by the Legislature of Virginia, March 8, 1847, and re-affirmed in 1849: 66 Resolved unanimously, That all territory which may be acquired by the arms of the United States, or yielded by treaty with any foreign power, belongs to the several States of this Union, as their joint and common property, in which each and all have equal rights; and that the enactment, by the Federal Government, of any law which should directly, or by its effects, prevent the citizens of any State from emigrating with their property, of whatever description, into such territory, would make a discrimination unwarranted by, and in violation of, the compromises of the Constitution, and the rights of the

States from which such citizens emigrated, and in derogation of that perfect equality which belongs to the several States as members of this Union, and would directly tend to subvert the Union itself." This had a direct reference to the Wilmot proviso, but it had also a wider application.

6. Did those members of Congress who voted against extending the line of the Missouri Compromise from the 36° 30' to the Pacific Ocean, for the settlement of the sectional disputes in regard to territories, act judiciously and fairly? Could they have foreseen the evils which consequently sprang up afterwards, would they not have given a different vote, and thus have avoided those evils?

In the latter part of the Administration of Mr. POLK, the slave State members held nightly meetings, in which the socalled aggressions of Northern States were dwelt upon, and measures considered for the defence and protection of the South. Out of these meetings grew an address to the people of the slave-holding States, signed by about forty members of Congress. In that address, the following language is used: "We allude to the conflict between the two great sections of the Union, growing out of a difference of feeling and opinion in reference to the relation existing between the two races, the European and the African, which inhabit the Southern section, and the acts of aggression and encroachment to which it has led. The conflict commenced not long after the acknowledgment of our independence, and has gradually increased until it has arrayed the great body of the North against the South on this most vital subject. In the progress of this conflict, aggression has followed aggression, and encroachment encroachment, until they have reached a point when a regard for peace and safety will not permit us to remain longer silent."

CHAPTER XIII.

GENERAL TAYLOR AND MR. FILLMORE'S ADMINISTRATION.

66

MARCH 4, 1849-MARCH 4, 1853.

GENERAL ZACHARY TAYLOR was elected by the Whig party, on the ground of availability, and not on the ground of political experience and qualifications. He was regarded as an honest man, and as rough and ready" in war. Many of the Democratic party voted for him on the ground of his personal and popular qualities. He was elected on the platform of the Constitution, the subject of slavery being ignored by the Convention which nominated him.

Mr. Cass was nominated on a platform which expressed no opposition to slavery, and was acceptable to the slaveholding States generally.

Mr. VAN BUREN was nominated at Buffalo, by a portion of the Democratic party, in consequence of the rejection of the two sets of delegates from New York, by the Democratic nominating Convention at Baltimore. One of these factions in that State whose delegates had been rejected, determined to assert its claim to being the Democratic party of New York, by nominating a candidate of its own. President DWIGHT once said that the old "Council of Appointment" in New York "was a hornet's nest in the kitchen." That Council had been long since abolished, but still, as late as 1848, difficulties existed connected with the appointing power. The hornet's nest had been removed, but the hornets remained. In the platform adopted at Buffalo, it was declared to be the duty of the Federal Government to abolish slavery wherever it can constitutionally be done; thus pointing to the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia. It

[ocr errors]

was also declared in that platform that Congress alone can prevent the existence of slavery in the Territories; thus pointing to exclusion of slavery in the Territories. The party assumed the name of "Free soilers," or "Free-soil party," and rejoiced in the watchword, "Free speech," "Free labor," "Free men." The "Liberty party," or "Free-soil party," of New York, might have elected Mr. CLAY in 1844, or Mr. Cass in 1848, by throwing their votes with the Whig party at the one election, or with the Democratic party in the other.

General TAYLOR came into office when there was strong sectional feeling both North and South, excited by the attempt to pass the Wilmot proviso, and by many other aggressive movements of the Northern States. These States, or large numbers in these, were disposed:

1. To exclude slayes from the Territories, and in this way to prevent any more slave States from coming into the Union. 2. To abolish slave representation in Congress, by an amendment to the Constitution. This was limited to a few States. 3. To suppress the slave trade between the States, and in the District of Columbia,

[ocr errors]

4. To abolish slavery in the District of Columbia.

5. To prevent the capture of fugitive slaves, or at least not to aid in restoring them to their owners. . .

T

6. To abolish slavery in the States as soon as can constitutionally be done, by an amendment to the Constitution.

In pressing these subjects upon the attention of Congress, a very bitter feeling was awakened in both the Northern and Southern States, which threatened disunion as a natural consequence.

At this time there was an especial interest in the subject of slavery restriction in the Territories, not only on account of the attempted imposition of the Wilmot proviso, but also on account of the projected admission of California.

DANGER OF DISUNION.

So deeply impressed was Mr. CLAY with the danger of disunion, that he brought forward in the Senate, January 29, 1850, his celebrated Compromise Resolutions, for the settlement of

« ZurückWeiter »